MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332395064 · doi:10.1021/nn203438u

Colloidal Quantum Dot Photovoltaics: A Path Forward

2011· article· en· W2332395064 on OpenAlexaff
Illan J. Kramer, Edward H. Sargent

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicQuantum Dots Synthesis And Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersKing Abdullah University of Science and Technology
KeywordsPhotovoltaicsQuantum dotPhotovoltaic systemNanotechnologyOptoelectronicsMaterials scienceMultiple exciton generationBand gapEngineering physicsElectronicsPhysicsElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Colloidal quantum dots (CQDs) offer a path toward high-efficiency photovoltaics based on low-cost materials and processes. Spectral tunability via the quantum size effect facilitates absorption of specific wavelengths from across the sun's broad spectrum. CQD materials' ease of processing derives from their synthesis, storage, and processing in solution. Rapid advances have brought colloidal quantum dot photovoltaic solar power conversion efficiencies of 6% in the latest reports. These achievements represent important first steps toward commercially compelling performance. Here we review advances in device architecture and materials science. We diagnose the principal phenomenon-electronic states within the CQD film band gap that limit both current and voltage in devices-that must be cured for CQD PV devices to fulfill their promise. We close with a prescription, expressed as bounds on the density and energy of electronic states within the CQD film band gap, that should allow device efficiencies to rise to those required for the future of the solar energy field.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations358
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS NanoSame topicQuantum Dots Synthesis And PropertiesFrench-language works237,207